YES proof of /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.xml # AProVE Commit ID: 794c25de1cacf0d048858bcd21c9a779e1221865 marcel 20200619 unpublished dirty Termination w.r.t. Q of the given QTRS could be proven: (0) QTRS (1) DependencyPairsProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (2) QDP (3) QDPOrderProof [EQUIVALENT, 6 ms] (4) QDP (5) MRRProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (6) QDP (7) DependencyGraphProof [EQUIVALENT, 0 ms] (8) TRUE ---------------------------------------- (0) Obligation: Q restricted rewrite system: The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) a(x1) -> b(b(b(x1))) b(c(b(x1))) -> a(c(x1)) Q is empty. ---------------------------------------- (1) DependencyPairsProof (EQUIVALENT) Using Dependency Pairs [AG00,LPAR04] we result in the following initial DP problem. ---------------------------------------- (2) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(c(x1)) -> B(x1) A(x1) -> B(b(b(x1))) A(x1) -> B(b(x1)) A(x1) -> B(x1) B(c(b(x1))) -> A(c(x1)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) a(x1) -> b(b(b(x1))) b(c(b(x1))) -> a(c(x1)) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (3) QDPOrderProof (EQUIVALENT) We use the reduction pair processor [LPAR04,JAR06]. The following pairs can be oriented strictly and are deleted. A(c(x1)) -> B(x1) The remaining pairs can at least be oriented weakly. Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 The following usable rules [FROCOS05] with respect to the argument filtering of the ordering [JAR06] were oriented: a(x1) -> b(b(b(x1))) b(c(b(x1))) -> a(c(x1)) a(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) ---------------------------------------- (4) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(x1) -> B(b(b(x1))) A(x1) -> B(b(x1)) A(x1) -> B(x1) B(c(b(x1))) -> A(c(x1)) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) a(x1) -> b(b(b(x1))) b(c(b(x1))) -> a(c(x1)) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (5) MRRProof (EQUIVALENT) By using the rule removal processor [LPAR04] with the following ordering, at least one Dependency Pair or term rewrite system rule of this QDP problem can be strictly oriented. Strictly oriented dependency pairs: A(x1) -> B(b(x1)) A(x1) -> B(x1) B(c(b(x1))) -> A(c(x1)) Strictly oriented rules of the TRS R: b(c(b(x1))) -> a(c(x1)) Used ordering: Polynomial interpretation [POLO]: POL(A(x_1)) = 2 + x_1 POL(B(x_1)) = x_1 POL(a(x_1)) = 3 + x_1 POL(b(x_1)) = 1 + x_1 POL(c(x_1)) = 3*x_1 ---------------------------------------- (6) Obligation: Q DP problem: The TRS P consists of the following rules: A(x1) -> B(b(b(x1))) The TRS R consists of the following rules: a(c(x1)) -> c(b(x1)) a(x1) -> b(b(b(x1))) Q is empty. We have to consider all minimal (P,Q,R)-chains. ---------------------------------------- (7) DependencyGraphProof (EQUIVALENT) The approximation of the Dependency Graph [LPAR04,FROCOS05,EDGSTAR] contains 0 SCCs with 1 less node. ---------------------------------------- (8) TRUE